Why the Concern About Pesticide Residues?
Everywhere we turn today, questions
arise about food safety. In fact, three out of four Americans believe pesticide
residues are a major health hazard. How do we help Kentucky consumers feel
more confidence in their food supply? Should we advise Kentucky farmers
to change their production practices? When a crisis comes, how can we help?
People are more aware of food safety
than ever before. The scares of the past few years, including concern over
Alar, have sharpened many Americans' perceptions. Consumers are concerned
because they have no way to detect levels of pesticide residues, and no
control over what is applied. So, consumers must figure out whom to trust:
Government regulating agencies? Scientists? The people who grow and market
the food we eat? How do consumers know what is safe?

Why Use Pesticides?
If so many concerns have been raised
about pesticides, why use them? Currently, pesticides are an important
part of food production. Without pesticides,
•American food would be more expensive.
•Food production would require more
labor and more intensive, knowledgeable management.
•American farmers would produce less
food and supplies would be more variable.
•Our food supply's quality would be
lessened.
•Storage life of some fresh foods reduced.
•Some food would be less safe (because
it would contain harmful organisms).

Pesticides, like other chemicals used
in our society, have possible health and environmental risks and definite
benefits for both producers and consumers. At present, pests destroy 30%
($20 billion worth) of crops each year in the US. Without pesticide use,
crop losses and food costs could increase up to 50%. Pesticides lower food
costs by preventing direct loss of a product due to pests. Their usage
also increases food's value (often cosmetically), food's safety (by reducing
harmful organisms) and its storage life.

Putting the Concern About Pesticide Residues in Perspective
Other factors besides pesticides affect
Americans' diets. In reality, food-borne disease, malnutrition, environmental
contaminants and naturally-occurring toxins pose more risk than pesticide
residues. For example, in one year the average consumer of commercial foods
consumes .0014 ounce of pesticides which has about the same toxic effect
as consuming one cup of coffee or one aspirin.
Of course, most pesticides, if eaten
in high enough amounts, are unsafe to humans. In addition, some possibly
cause cancer, mutations or other ill-effects.
How do we know that we are avoiding
these potentially dangerous amounts? The Food and Drug Administration (FDA)
and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), both federal agencies, are
responsible for evaluating, setting and enforcing safe levels of pesticide
residues which are allowed to remain in food for human consumption. Pesticides
cannot be registered (that is, they cannot be sold in the US) unless the
safe level (tolerance) is set. These tolerances are set after rigorous
field tests, which involve the maximum usage of that pesticide. Also, scientists
must determine that no observable effect is found in sensitive laboratory
animals.
EPA scientists calculate the safe daily
intake of any particular pesticide for humans, and build in a 100 fold
safety factor. They base their calculations on results from non-injurious
laboratory animal tests. This procedure sets a legal residue level. The
EPA determines how much of that pesticide's residue consumers are exposed
to and what the maximum possible exposure could be. To figure that out,
they suppose that a certain crop is treated with the highest legal rates
of a pesticide and that consumers eat that crop every day for a lifetime.
If the maximum possible exposure to a chemical is less than the legal residue
level, the EPA grants the tolerance.
The EPA considers the risk that any
particular pesticide will cause cancer to be negligible (almost non-existent)
if less than one person out of a million develops cancer as a result of
the pesticide. Of course the EPA recognizes that different segments of
the population have different eating habits and therefore some people may
consume greater (or smaller) than average quantities of some foods.
The FDA has responsibility for enforcing
EPA pesticide tolerances in food. It also enforces any prohibitions of
pesticide residue in food for which there is no tolerance. Their labs use
sophisticated instruments to determine extremely low levels of pesticides
in food, so if a chemical is misused, the lab should find it. This threat
of discovery and punishment for pesticide misuse encourages growers and
processors to comply with the EPA rules. In 1987 the FDA found that less
than 1% of nearly 15,000 imported and domestic food samples contained violative
residues. The majority of these violations involved residues for which
no tolerance was granted on the crop rather than excessive residues.
Some food processors and retailers
are beginning to set more stringent standards than the EPA and FDA require.
These retailers ban certain pesticides on foods they sell.

Alternate Food Production Systems and Cost/Benefit Ration
Currently, many people are interested
in systems that grow food without pesticide residues. While there is much
interest in organic alternatives, some of these alternatives also may be
carcinogenic, mutagenic or toxic. Pesticide reduction on foods (that is,
using the least amount of pesticide needed to get the job done) may be
best accomplished through Integrated Pest Management (IPM) programs.
IPM integrates all pest management
techniques into one crop management strategy. Pesticides may be used, but
only when economic thresholds (damaging population levels) are reached.
In other words, the producer does not routinely spray for a certain pest,
but waits until that pest is at a level where it will economically damage
the crop. IPM programs also use biological controls and other cultural
practices like rotating crops.
In the debate about organic food, remember
one thing: A certain food has the same calories and nutrients no matter
how it is produced. "Organic" vegetables and fruit are not more nutritious
than their "non-organic" counterparts.

Risk
Undoubtedly, many of the pesticides
used today cause cancer, mutations and other problems. Some are just toxic.
Exposure to high levels of these materials is assumed to be risky. Despite
assurances of negligible risk, the health effects of exposure to multiple
chemicals and their carriers are largely unknown. Thus, anyone using pesticides
should only use them safely and wisely.
Remember that many of the foods we
eat contain numbers and levels of cancer-causing agents that do not come
from pesticides and that are higher than the levels posed by pesticides.
More research on biology and non-chemical control of pests is needed, so
that in the future non-chemical treatments can be an option for farmers
and consumers alike. We hope that methods will be developed to determine
more precisely the real risks of pesticide residues as compared to natural
toxins. With greater information and a rational perspective, the consumer
will be able to make better informed choices.

What We Suggest
The Cooperative Extension Service recommends
that farmers carefully use only the amount of pesticide necessary to control
correctly identified, economically important pests. We believe that the
health benefits of today's foods far exceed the risk of pesticide residues.
In fact, today's food is the safest and least expensive in history. FOR
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION CONTACT YOUR UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY COUNTY EXTENSION
SERVICE COUNTY OFFICE.

Useful Information
1-800-858-7378 National Pesticide Telecommunications
Network. This is a 24 hour free service funded by the US Environmental
Protection Agency: Purpose to provide a variety of impartial information
about pesticides to anyone.
1-800-722-5725 Kentucky Regional Poison
Control Center of Kosair Children's Hospital. Anyone with a poisoning emergency
can call this number for help. Personnel at the Control Center will give
you first aid information and direct you to local treatment centers if
necessary.

Gianissi, L. P. and C. R. Greene. The Use of Pesticides in the Production
of Vegetables; Benefits, Alternatives and Regulatory Policies. In Vegetables
and Specialties, Situation and Outlook Report, TVS-245, Econ. Res. Serv.
USDA, Washington, D.C. 1988.